Handgun Sales

Syrup Beaver said:
That's where my statement was leading.

People who've had their drivers license for three years or less are already not using turn signals, not paying attention to the road, etc.

Like I said, you can't force the stupid out of people.
Click to expand...

Good point but if it wont "hurt" like gun bans do, then why not? There could also be an every 5 year evaluation done by a professional in an obviously field.

I guess that is asking to much but if it saves lives, where do you draw the line? Would be tough considering how many gun owners there are though
 
a "battle"?? :fly:





stupid would be hard to quantify.. maybe no guns for HS dropouts or something??? tho that certainly sounds discriminatory.


crazy i think would be easier.. baker acted? felons? um, maybe some kind of medical history check (tho that sounds really "invasive") to see who's on bipolar and/or anti-depressant drugs?

my 2.
 
Or maybe you could go the other route, and rather than outlaw the tool you could outlaw the outcome. Make it totally illegal to kill someone no matter what. No legal defense for protecting property. Very slim definition of self defense.

And a national DNA database so you can pull DNA from a weapon and know who the perpetrator was.
 
Shalimar said:
a "battle"?? :fly:





stupid would be hard to quantify.. maybe no guns for HS dropouts or something??? tho that certainly sounds discriminatory.


crazy i think would be easier.. baker acted? felons? um, maybe some kind of medical history check (tho that sounds really "invasive") to see who's on bipolar and/or anti-depressant drugs?

my 2.
Click to expand...

I dont think Felons can legally own a handgun anyways :confused:

Stupidity was to broad of a term I think. You can be dumb as a box of rocks but know gun rules, laws and how to operate. Cops have to go through specific training, why shouldn't the general public if they will have (practically) the same power. This is completely my opinion but say I was being chased by the cops and had a gun, I would use it as last resort cause they are a better shot than me, much better. If you know that random bob down the street who just slept with your wife or who has a nicer tv than you or whatever reason had full police gun training you might think twice. This way we would need some sort of evaluation though, just like cops do.
 
Last edited:
Jonny_B said:
Or maybe you could go the other route, and rather than outlaw the tool you could outlaw the outcome. Make it totally illegal to kill someone no matter what. No legal defense for protecting property. Very slim definition of self defense.

And a national DNA database so you can pull DNA from a weapon and know who the perpetrator was.
Click to expand...

Instead of the 600 dollar tax break they probably should have just mailed out guns :fly:
 
heard a stat a few years back (from my gun enthusiast relatives) that in America, and this includes law enforcement officers as well as general pop, ONLY 1 IN 7 GUN SHOTS FIRED hits who's getting aimed at.


so, ALWAYS, bob and weave if you bout to get shot.
 
Shalimar said:
heard a stat a few years back (from my gun enthusiast relatives) that in America, and this includes law enforcement officers as well as general pop, ONLY 1 IN 7 GUN SHOTS FIRED hits who's getting aimed at.


so, ALWAYS, bob and weave if you bout to get shot.
Click to expand...

hahahahaha

this just reminded me of that lawyer who is attacked by a guy with a gun...


erg, couldnt find it but its played all the time. he bob and weaves behind this tree and the guys like 5 feet away, whole clip, doesnt even hit him :fly:
 
Again, you can't stop people from hurting themselves and each other. If you even try, you'll just legislate that item right into a total ban. Drugs, guns, cars, refrigerators, etc.

And who is going to pay for this total background check? I hope not the government, because determining if someone is crazy is fuckin expensive. If the user has to do it, well you've just banned low income people from legally defending themselves, and guess what those people have access to? Yep, illegal weapons!
 
BeerAd said:
hahahahaha

this just reminded me of that lawyer who is attacked by a guy with a gun...


erg, couldnt find it but its played all the time. he bob and weaves behind this tree and the guys like 5 feet away, whole clip, doesnt even hit him :fly:
Click to expand...



Why else do you think you were taught dodgeball in school as a kid?
 
fly said:
Again, you can't stop people from hurting themselves and each other. If you even try, you'll just legislate that item right into a total ban. Drugs, guns, cars, refrigerators, etc.

And who is going to pay for this total background check? I hope not the government, because determining if someone is crazy is fuckin expensive. If the user has to do it, well you've just banned low income people from legally defending themselves, and guess what those people have access to? Yep, illegal weapons!
Click to expand...

children get trapped in refrigerators all the time and die...BAN THEM!!
 
BeerAd said:
If you want you can research the number of home shootings where the person was hurt by there own gun.
Click to expand...

Of course the link knyte provided may be skewed towards one side, but you certainly may learn some things from it man. Seriously. To be honest, I used to agree with you totally, until I did my research. The common sense approach that you (and I used to) have simply doesn't hold up to the statistics...

For instance:
from knytes link said:
Myth: You are more likely to be injured or killed using a gun for self-defense

Fact: You are far more likely to survive a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun. In episodes where a robbery victim was injured, the injury/defense rates were:
Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%
Click to expand...
 
fly said:
Of course the link knyte provided may be skewed towards one side, but you certainly may learn some things from it man. Seriously. To be honest, I used to agree with you totally, until I did my research. The common sense approach that you (and I used to) have simply doesn't hold up to the statistics...
Click to expand...
Nor logic, really.

I'd like to think I had a hand in swaying your opinion, way back when :lol:
 
I would never expect the likelihood of injury to be greater when you are defending yourself with a gun. I would, however, expect you to be more likely to die if the robber and/or you has a gun. You can recover from an injury, you can't recover from dead.
 
Jonny_B said:
I would never expect the likelihood of injury to be greater when you are defending yourself with a gun. I would, however, expect you to be more likely to die if the robber and/or you has a gun. You can recover from an injury, you can't recover from dead.
Click to expand...


Not unless you eat Brains!
 
fly said:
Of course the link knyte provided may be skewed towards one side, but you certainly may learn some things from it man. Seriously. To be honest, I used to agree with you totally, until I did my research. The common sense approach that you (and I used to) have simply doesn't hold up to the statistics...

For instance:
Click to expand...

True and I am not arguing with statistics but to think we cant do anything just because the ultimate end(banning guns) didnt work is a little short sided. I dont think my opinions are absolutely correct or will even be the next step but thats why they are my opinions. I never mean to work anyone up over them and dont think I have given any reason in this thread to do that but if I have it was not intensional. I enjoy guns and I enjoy shooting them I just think there is more we could do safety wise, you know?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back